back on the old site I remember there being a list so that users could see actions taken against violators of the site policy.Something like that could be used here,otherwise we are all blind as to what actions are being taken.
It can make it appear as nothing is being done to help keep the site an enjoyable place to be.Which we know is not true.
But it would be nice to know that certain concerns are being dealt with.
- looiecypher
- 03-04-2010, 11:10 AM
- swwaustin
- 03-04-2010, 11:27 AM
I agree, and it would help stop speculation and provide some closure.
- ANONONE
- 03-04-2010, 11:33 AM
I think there is something like that in the avatar section status section. I have seen "banned" and "away" under the handles of a few old posts from folks.
I like your idea though. . .
Heck, I would even go further, why not bell the cat, and right underneath their avatar put a points count like this:
Join Date: April 1, 2009
Location: The Big Tent
Posts: 420
Reviews: 0
Points: 7
Suspensions/Bans: 2
This may even help cut drama. If you find yourself tempted to get in a debate with someone, you will be able to quickly surmise it isn't worth the keystrokes if they are folks that are prone to stirring stuff up for amusement rather than information exchange and have a clear paper trail that screams: IGNORE/AVOID.
I like your idea though. . .
Heck, I would even go further, why not bell the cat, and right underneath their avatar put a points count like this:
Join Date: April 1, 2009
Location: The Big Tent
Posts: 420
Reviews: 0
Points: 7
Suspensions/Bans: 2
This may even help cut drama. If you find yourself tempted to get in a debate with someone, you will be able to quickly surmise it isn't worth the keystrokes if they are folks that are prone to stirring stuff up for amusement rather than information exchange and have a clear paper trail that screams: IGNORE/AVOID.
- administrator
- 03-04-2010, 02:31 PM
NOTHING will ever stop speculation, my friends.
looiecypher,
I agree it is very important that a) members see that staff IS taking action on certain things, and b) that members see HOW we are taking action.
This serves 2 purposes. 1) the members take comfort in knowing we are on top of things and not just letting all the problem children and trouble makers succeed in making everyone's life around them completely miserable, and 2) it educates members about what is and what is not acceptable conduct on this board.
For this reason, it is a general practice of mine to leave footprints INSIDE the offending post so that readers who may stumble across a thread and encounter the offending post will take note that staff has addressed the issue and how they dealt with it.
For example...
b) the footprint shows staff has been there and addressed the issue
c) the footprint educates the members on what type of conduct is not permitted and what action this type of conduct will bring about.
Now, we get alot of RTMs from members who encounter a vulgar post or one with profanity, or one that is just generally offensive in nature.....we DO NOT remove stuff like that from public view. If you've seen that happen on occasion, it's because we have staff here who have been accustomed to a different way of doing things from past staff positions, and we are trying to re-train them to a new philosophy of doing things.
The philosophy is this: We want our members to get behind our staff actions and support our decisions. If we remove the stuff that we are giving reprimands for, how could somebody come along and come to the conclusion that staff took appropriate action or made the right decision?? If all you see is: edited by staff and action taken.....but nothing else but a blank post or severely "chopped up" thread, then you are LEFT GUESSING. That's where the speculation you spoke of comes in....and before long, the members start saying to themselves, "if they removed these comments, what the hell else are they editing out???" It pretty much goes downhill from there.
The Disciplinary Action Thread you speak of from ASPD was a nifty idea and it served it's purpose for the most part...although i'm not so sure it was as useful a learning tool as it was a good form of public humiliation akin to stocks or a pillory. Some folks checked it daily....but just as in alot of other things, ECCIE has a bit of a different take on things. We do not want "disciplinary action" to be a primary focus around here.....not with our staff, and not with our members. It's a necessary evil, and one that we are committed to dealing with...but we just don't want to give it a whole lot of real estate, so to speak. You have probably already seen that since our staff personnel counts have been getting caught up with the recent surge in membership, we've been able to address matters as they come up far more promptly than before.
On a final note, some have asked over the past several weeks, 'does this board have rules, and where are they posted?' That's a damn good question. Many of the rules this board has enforced over the past year have been of the unwritten common sense sort that you would likely come across on any board. With that said, I believe that it's to everyone's benefit that we have some logical and reasonably flexible guidelines posted so that it's a level playing field and everyone, from our members to our staff, knows what we expect from each other. I've been working on those for some time now and will more than likely get something posted for the members around the ECCIE 1st Year birthday (3-16-10)
Stay tuned, and thanks to everyone for their interest and concern in making ECCIE the best damn place on the net.
St. C
looiecypher,
I agree it is very important that a) members see that staff IS taking action on certain things, and b) that members see HOW we are taking action.
This serves 2 purposes. 1) the members take comfort in knowing we are on top of things and not just letting all the problem children and trouble makers succeed in making everyone's life around them completely miserable, and 2) it educates members about what is and what is not acceptable conduct on this board.
For this reason, it is a general practice of mine to leave footprints INSIDE the offending post so that readers who may stumble across a thread and encounter the offending post will take note that staff has addressed the issue and how they dealt with it.
For example...
Hey St. Christopher, you're a Goddamn mother fucking, cock sucking piece of shit!!!Any member who came across this post would conclude a number of things a) this board doesn't censor or hide controversial stuff from it's membership. We leave it there, in tact, for the members to see.
[disrespect to staff and insulting remarks are not permitted on this board-warning points issued] Originally Posted by looiecypher
b) the footprint shows staff has been there and addressed the issue
c) the footprint educates the members on what type of conduct is not permitted and what action this type of conduct will bring about.
Now, we get alot of RTMs from members who encounter a vulgar post or one with profanity, or one that is just generally offensive in nature.....we DO NOT remove stuff like that from public view. If you've seen that happen on occasion, it's because we have staff here who have been accustomed to a different way of doing things from past staff positions, and we are trying to re-train them to a new philosophy of doing things.
The philosophy is this: We want our members to get behind our staff actions and support our decisions. If we remove the stuff that we are giving reprimands for, how could somebody come along and come to the conclusion that staff took appropriate action or made the right decision?? If all you see is: edited by staff and action taken.....but nothing else but a blank post or severely "chopped up" thread, then you are LEFT GUESSING. That's where the speculation you spoke of comes in....and before long, the members start saying to themselves, "if they removed these comments, what the hell else are they editing out???" It pretty much goes downhill from there.
The Disciplinary Action Thread you speak of from ASPD was a nifty idea and it served it's purpose for the most part...although i'm not so sure it was as useful a learning tool as it was a good form of public humiliation akin to stocks or a pillory. Some folks checked it daily....but just as in alot of other things, ECCIE has a bit of a different take on things. We do not want "disciplinary action" to be a primary focus around here.....not with our staff, and not with our members. It's a necessary evil, and one that we are committed to dealing with...but we just don't want to give it a whole lot of real estate, so to speak. You have probably already seen that since our staff personnel counts have been getting caught up with the recent surge in membership, we've been able to address matters as they come up far more promptly than before.
On a final note, some have asked over the past several weeks, 'does this board have rules, and where are they posted?' That's a damn good question. Many of the rules this board has enforced over the past year have been of the unwritten common sense sort that you would likely come across on any board. With that said, I believe that it's to everyone's benefit that we have some logical and reasonably flexible guidelines posted so that it's a level playing field and everyone, from our members to our staff, knows what we expect from each other. I've been working on those for some time now and will more than likely get something posted for the members around the ECCIE 1st Year birthday (3-16-10)
Stay tuned, and thanks to everyone for their interest and concern in making ECCIE the best damn place on the net.
St. C
- flinde
- 03-04-2010, 02:53 PM
ASPD had that weird "he who has been banned shall not be mentioned and upon mention ye too shall be banned" rule.
So assuming you thought that this rule made sense, and wanted to comply, it was useful to have a list of the "unmentionables".
St. Christopher is right, the footprint of appropriate staff action can be seen in all instances that I have seen where warnings, post mod or banishment might be applicable.
I can personally attest to swift and appropriate admonishment/warning that I received when I stepped into the middle of a catfight with bare feet a few weeks ago.
Staff are to be commended for their vigilance, discretion and levelheadedness.
I must confess, I usually blow by threads like this without reading. But I saw the thread name "warning and suspension list" and I had to open to see if I had been publicly warned, suspended banned etc--kinda like checking the obits in the Express News every morning to see if your name is in there that we all do after a certain age.
So assuming you thought that this rule made sense, and wanted to comply, it was useful to have a list of the "unmentionables".
St. Christopher is right, the footprint of appropriate staff action can be seen in all instances that I have seen where warnings, post mod or banishment might be applicable.
I can personally attest to swift and appropriate admonishment/warning that I received when I stepped into the middle of a catfight with bare feet a few weeks ago.
Staff are to be commended for their vigilance, discretion and levelheadedness.
I must confess, I usually blow by threads like this without reading. But I saw the thread name "warning and suspension list" and I had to open to see if I had been publicly warned, suspended banned etc--kinda like checking the obits in the Express News every morning to see if your name is in there that we all do after a certain age.
- rakuguy
- 03-04-2010, 05:33 PM
The Witch: I'm not a witch I'm not a witch!
Sir Bedevere: But you are dressed as one
The Witch: *They* dressed me up like this!
Crowd: We didn't! We didn't...
The Witch: And this isn't my nose. It's a false one.
Sir Bedevere: [lifts up her false nose] Well?
Peasant 1: Well, we did do the nose.
Sir Bedevere: The nose?
Peasant 1: And the hat, but she is a witch!
Crowd: Yeah! Burn her! Burn her!
Sir Bedevere: Did you dress her up like this?
Peasant 1: No!
Peasant 3, Peasant 2: No!
Peasant 3: No!
Peasant 1: No!
Peasant 3, Peasant 2: No!
Peasant 1: Yes!
Peasant 2: Yes!
Peasant 1: Yeah a bit.
Peasant 3: A bit!
Peasant 1, Peasant 2: A bit!
Peasant 2: a bit
Peasant 1: But she has got a wart!
Crowd: Put her on the Warning and Suspension List!
Sir Bedevere: But you are dressed as one
The Witch: *They* dressed me up like this!
Crowd: We didn't! We didn't...
The Witch: And this isn't my nose. It's a false one.
Sir Bedevere: [lifts up her false nose] Well?
Peasant 1: Well, we did do the nose.
Sir Bedevere: The nose?
Peasant 1: And the hat, but she is a witch!
Crowd: Yeah! Burn her! Burn her!
Sir Bedevere: Did you dress her up like this?
Peasant 1: No!
Peasant 3, Peasant 2: No!
Peasant 3: No!
Peasant 1: No!
Peasant 3, Peasant 2: No!
Peasant 1: Yes!
Peasant 2: Yes!
Peasant 1: Yeah a bit.
Peasant 3: A bit!
Peasant 1, Peasant 2: A bit!
Peasant 2: a bit
Peasant 1: But she has got a wart!
Crowd: Put her on the Warning and Suspension List!